PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "A Brady violation arises when prosecutors fail to disclose evidence favorable to the accused that is material to guilt or punishment. The obligation stems from the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Brady v. Maryland (1963). Courts recognize such violations as serious constitutional concerns because withheld evidence may affect a defendant’s ability to receive a fair trial. According to court findings, McCabe Law along with the Korey Wise Innocence Project (KWIP) spent years investigating the case, filing legal motions, and pursuing the evidentiary hearing that led to the ruling. During the hearing, attorneys questioned witnesses under oath, cross-examined the former prosecutor, and presented evidence related to the withheld materials."
----------------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The case is currently scheduled for a status conference on March 27, 2026, during which the court is expected to address the next phase of proceedings following the Brady ruling. McCabe Law will continue representing its client as the matter proceeds. This ruling reflects the importance of thorough criminal defense representation in serious felony matters and highlights the role post-conviction litigation can play in reviewing constitutional concerns raised during criminal proceedings."
----------------------------------------------
RELEASE: "Colorado Court Finds El Paso County District Attorney Withheld Evidence in Homicide Case," by McCabe Law (Janeen McCabe) published in The National Law Review, on May 18, 2026. (McCabe Law’s team of Boulder criminal defense attorneys has represented clients throughout Colorado for more than 20 years. The firm focuses exclusively on criminal defense and protection order matters. McCabe Law attorneys have extensive trial experience handling serious felony and misdemeanor cases in courts across Colorado. Firm attorneys are active in Colorado’s legal community and hold leadership positions in organizations including the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar and the Boulder Bar Association.)
SUB-HEADING: "After fighting for this client since 2019, the judge found the DA withheld exculpatory evidence following a seven-day evidentiary hearing."
SUB-HEADING: "McCabe Law has represented Deb Nicholls since 2019, navigating years of complex litigation related to prosecutorial misconduct."
The court found that the prosecution committed a Brady violation, which refers to the failure to disclose evidence favorable to the defense.
The ruling followed a five-day evidentiary hearing during which multiple witnesses testified, including the former prosecutor involved in the original case (El Paso County CO 07CR5429).
After reviewing testimony and evidence presented during the hearing, the presiding judge concluded that material evidence was withheld from the defense, which likely would have changed the outcome of the trial.
The prosecution had worked with an analyst at CBI in 2006 and knew they sided with the defense expert, finding that there was no support for arson with an accelerant and withheld that information from the defense, the judge, and the jury.
The prosecution hid the evidence, failed to call that witness at trial, and instead cast the defense expert as a hired gun who was unreliable.
A Brady violation arises when prosecutors fail to disclose evidence favorable to the accused that is material to guilt or punishment.
The obligation stems from the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Brady v. Maryland (1963). Courts recognize such violations as serious constitutional concerns because withheld evidence may affect a defendant’s ability to receive a fair trial.
According to court findings, McCabe Law along with the Korey Wise Innocence Project (KWIP) spent years investigating the case, filing legal motions, and pursuing the evidentiary hearing that led to the ruling.
During the hearing, attorneys questioned witnesses under oath, cross-examined the former prosecutor, and presented evidence related to the withheld materials.
The case is currently scheduled for a status conference on March 27, 2026, during which the court is expected to address the next phase of proceedings following the Brady ruling. McCabe Law will continue representing its client as the matter proceeds.
This ruling reflects the importance of thorough criminal defense representation in serious felony matters and highlights the role post-conviction litigation can play in reviewing constitutional concerns raised during criminal proceedings.
..................................
McCabe Law’s team of Boulder criminal defense attorneys has represented clients throughout Colorado for more than 20 years. The firm focuses exclusively on criminal defense and protection order matters. McCabe Law attorneys have extensive trial experience handling serious felony and misdemeanor cases in courts across Colorado. Firm attorneys are active in Colorado’s legal community and hold leadership positions in organizations including the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar and the Boulder Bar Association."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog. FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."Lawyer Radha Natarajan: Executive Director: New England Innocence Project; FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true;
